News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Acephalic Agile: Worse than Waterfall? by rossdavidh on Thursday May 17, 2018 @05:08PM (#17095845)
"At least in Waterfall if you did a good job of designing the project, and if you stuck to the spirit of the method, you were to some extent insulated from management noise..."

I think it's an interesting article, with good points, but fundamentally I have to disagree with this statement. Empirically, it just isn't true, in my experience. It just means that all those changes by the customer to what they wanted, that the devs object to and management (which has to meet the customer face to face) always in the end agrees to, happen at the end, when they are more difficult, because up until that point the project wasn't "real" to the client, and they really couldn't tell you what they wanted until they saw that what you built wasn't it.

Re:Acephalic Agile: Worse than Waterfall? by vannevar on Thursday May 17, 2018 @05:18PM (#17095973)
People constantly confuse agile development with software design. Agile is not, and was never intended to be, a way to design software. It is a way to implement software. How you design it is up to you, though agile certainly encourages you to involve all stakeholders from the beginning, and to make design changes incrementally throughout development as circumstances warrant. But it is not a design methodology.
Re:Acephalic Agile: Worse than Waterfall? by vannevar on Friday May 18, 2018 @11:03AM (#17102019)
It might be useful for the anonymous downvoter to contribute to the discussion. Why do you disagree?